CastIronFabric

nope. I reject the notion that cooking is 'uncompromising'. EDIT: to put a finer note, when the ads say this game is 'uncompromising' I am confident that cooking is not the list that backs that up, I also have not seen cooking mentioned in the few videos I have seen that go into detail as to why this game is 'uncompromising' regardless, that is getting into subjective stuff that I am not going to engage in.

I would say your assessment on cooking is extremely subjective. I do not find cooking remotely 'uncompromising'. I am however inclined to avoid engaging anymore

let me walk you thru this. Cooking..'well the game says its uncompromising game thus cooking needs to be uncompromising' would you agree? SIDE TOPIC (EDIT): no, what I am saying is that if the dev decides 'this 'uncompromising' thing is not working out well' they can change it. Its not written in stone. I am not advocating that it be that way I am just saying I reject the arguement that something should be as it is BECAUSE it has been decided to be as it is. I reject that line of logic in all things

when it comes to fishing, I got a boar worth of meat from 3 worms I got with a grunter. I think the fishing feature was in part put in place to balance the berry changes for early game

ok, maybe do not reply

I am not advocating that it should not be. I think you are intentionally cherry picking what I said, I am not sure why you would do that but as a reminder that quote is related to specifically storms not needing to be dangerous because the game is ALREADY uncompromising without the storms.

If one wants continuity of lore I think it would make more sense in this case to change the dialogue at the village to match the experience that the vast majority of players have for most of their game play. The village is arguably late mid game if not late game, so it should take a back seat to be frank.

You: 'The game should be uncompromising' Me: 'The game IS uncompromising right now' One could argue that every single feature in the game should be 'uncompromising'. I personally do not think it should, but the game is already uncompromising without storms. Storms are not required for the game to be uncompromising because the game already is uncompromising That does not mean it cant be uncompromising but it means its not a requirement because the game already is uncompromising. A bit off topic but relevant: not to mention, the 'uncompromising' aspect can change if its so desired to be changed, if any aspect of the existing game no matter how long established causes unpleasant gaming experience by the community and/or developer they CAN change it.

again, you are building the argument that the least engaging features of this game are the most important features of this game becasue they are tied to what you think is an immutable lore of which the developers have never stated is immutable. I am not going to go over every detail of what I have said to re-asset with endless evidence that it DOES apply to what you said, becasue I believe you know better. The above is the bottom line here and its something I do not agree with it at all.

1. Berry bush mechanics have existed as is LONGER than the story. 2. Have they stated that the story is immutable? have the stated that berry bushes are mutable? because unless they have EXPLICTLY stated it, the berry bushes are actually more immutable than story becasue they have been around as is longer than the story. 3. There are two features of this game that are the least popular, least directly engaged in, least intresting by the player base. Those two features are the exact features you all claim are critically important to keep in place because they are tied to lore of which most people are not even well versed in the lore, do not even interact with the lore until mid to late game. So the arguements here are actually the EXACT opposite. Berry bushes are objectively more important than the lore for reasons i have spelled out but I can itemize them again if you like lets be clear, the position you are framing is that currently in the game as it stands now, some of the most important features of the game play experiece and could possibly destroy the entire game if changed too much is A. monsters spawning around your base B. storms Do the developers personally think story is critically important in this game? perhaps, I have not seen them say that explictly however even if they did, it does not mean its unchangeable. I watch way more VS youtubde videos than is likely healthy and I have to say over the course of 12 months I have seen literally ONE video that talks about the story of the game. I submit that for this game, the story is really not as important as you think it is.

I will say this about that. The reason this game is 'uncompromising' and the reason there exists currently videos talking about how 'hard core' and hard this game is CURRENTLY is not because of storms. its because of food, monsters at night and hostile animals. Storms barely even enter the orbit

its not obvious. you keep making assertions that are not only not obvious often times are illgocial. 1. The idea that lore sets the basic architecture for the overall game is FALSE and not founded on evidence. 2. The idea that people play this specific game mostly because of the lore is FALSE and not remotely close founded on evidence 3. The idea that if you changed something in the game that affects the lore that the VAST majority of people do not even know is lore somehow affects everyones experience in the game is FALSE 4. The claim that the developers consider the lore to be well established is founded on ZERO evidence of that anymore than they have consider berry bushes to be well established and founded. 5. your reasoning is completely circular and could be applied to anything in the game, pause and think about it for a second. I can walk you thru it if you like. Its ironic how the two specific features of this game that are the least engaging for the player to the point of most players just finding it a bother is proclaimed by many here to be the most important aspect of the game. Those two features are monsters spawning around your base and storms. The importance of those two things proclaimed here on the forums are actually the EXACT opposite in the game play experience. Lore? well most players do not even know the lore and those that do only learn about in the game play by around late mid game.

when the last time you experienced a storm in real life in which said storm was global? why do we presume the storms have to be global when real life storms do not operate that way and there is zero reference in the lore that even suggests storms are global let alone should be global.

the counter arguments are 'the developer is the final say on lore' however nobody wants to respond to my point that using the exact same logic 'the developers are the final say on Farming, smithing, smelting, cooking and EVERYTHING in the game' There does not exist evidence that i have seen that the developer considers the story more important than any other feature in the game and in fact changing FARMING has more of an impact on game play than changing Lore. The very premise that lore is the most important foundation in this game would logically suggest that the most important reason a person is compelled to play this specific game is because of the lore, which of course is completely and totally absurd and unbelievable. The story? really they lore? the lore is the main reason most people play this game? I reject that Story is NOT the creator of the tone, mystery, and thematic direction that is a myth people have been taught to believe. It CAN be but its not by FAR the main or only mechanism for that. More over, reading lore as if its a legally binding document absolutely positively will NOT affect tone, mystery, or thematic direction D&D is a good example, before they introduced story telling to Chainmail it has tone, mystery, and thematic direction. I would give you an example using the lore in this game but to be frank despite playing the game for about 1000 hours and enjoying the tone and overall feel I have no idea what the lore even is at all whatsoever other than storms do not have to be global. I also do not know anyone personally who knows the lore and yet they still love the game. You have to boil this absurdity to its core. If what you are saying is true the following would also be true. 1. the vast majority of people who enjoy this game would have to be playing it BECAUSE of the story. Reality is most people enjoy this game for thousands of hours and barely even know the story at all. 2.Minecraft, same thing. 3. Call of Duty, same thing. etc This is all just silly I know people get upset when Star Trek Lore gets broken, I do not know enough about Star Trek to really dispute or agree with that but the difference is that is 100% a story, this is a video game. In a video game there is plenty of strong evidence to support the assertion that the story is NOT the most important part of game play and is NOT the driver of the ton, it CAN be in some 'cut scene simulators' but not in this game, not in this game.

The developer is the final authority over all features including farming, spears, husbandry, cooking, smithing, smeltiing and in that sense those features are immutable using the EXACT same logic and EXACT same words

I keep repeating this like a broken record but I will have to do it again. The EXACT same logic you are using here can be applied to farming mechanics, berry mechanics, spears, armour every single aspect of the game this logic can be applied. Its circular logic. 'why it is good? becasue it has been decided to exist' that line of logic appears to ONLY be applied to lore, nothing else even though from a logic perspective it can be applied to everything created at this point in time. Additionally the presumption that the story is the foundation and that everything needs to revolve around it is fundamentally false and completely arbitrary .EDIT: In fact for this specific game, changing farming mechanics has more impact on game play than changing Lore. So this whole idea that Lore is the most immutable aspect of this game is just completely arbitrary and I suppose based on well assumptions (I want to go more into detail on that but it would lead this conversation very astray) @LadyWYT (tagged so so its read by Lady)

again 1. NPC dialogue saying 'the storm is coming we have to xzy' is not evidence that the storm should be global not even remotely. 2. a trailer of a person walking in a storm is not remotely evidence that a storm should be global. so I hold the following points given this fact. 1. storms not being global does not affect lore not even remotely suggested. 2. if I person is going to start interpreting the lore as like one does when reading the 3rd translation of the bible and cherry picking and taking out of context and reading into it what they want that just turns into a false excuse to disagree with any idea that is just simply not their own. 3. I fully reject that Lore is anymore immutable that farming mechanics. 4. I fully reject that that there exists evidence that the developers feel the lore as it stands currently is immutable and unchangeable anymore than farming mechanics. 5. I am not having a detailed conversation about my idea, I was using your claim that my idea conflicts with lore as an example of item number 2 on my orginal point that started this entire side conversation. 6. I asked you to give me an example of a suggestion for a change made in this forum that you feel does not conflict with the lore. a specfic example

to be clear I do not mean 'a place that you go that is always active'. It can be a place you go on a randomized timer or scheduled or whatever. I could not disagree with you more that such a parameter is important to a game experience but regardless I was not implying that it had to be static. Regarding NPC dialogues what you offered me was basically as follows :'a storm was coming and we had to xyz' that does NOT imply global even remotely. this of course is me engaging in a debate over lore specifics over a foundation of lore immutable importance that I fundamentally reject in the first place.

it is not clear. In fact, its clear that its NOT clear. The evidence you present that it is clear is logically the same as it would be for a commitment to farming mechanics. Storms do not have to be unavoidable, that too is NOT in the Lore. In fact, storms ARE avoidable already so...

you claimed that my suggestion to make storms a place you go to instead of global breaks lore. 1. It does not 2. cite me an example of a change that has been suggested that you think does not affect lore and as such is ok to discuss

however that is also not true. I made the suggestion that storms be a place you go to rather than something that happens globally. That does not conflict with lore but I was told that such a change is not acceptable because it would conflict with the lore even though it does not. So which changes specifically is acceptable I ask? Now, to be clear, I reject the core principle of the argument that lore is immutable or that its the core of a game but even if I was to not reject it, my example above is in accordance with number 2 on my list.

I do not think you understand what I said. 1. The CORE..the HEART of D&D is the ruleset NOT the stories, NOT the lore. That is evidence by the history of its creation 2. we still remain the problem that everyone is fine with talking about how to change/improve storms except that they are not because storms are related to lore. (perfectly circular logic) 3. everyone is without dispute ok talking about perhaps changing game mechanics not tied to lore, like lets say berries or spears or armour etc. But for some random reason lore and specifically only lore is immutable because 'its what the developers want'? why? again, circular logic 'they want it this way becasue it is this way'. ok..does that logic not apply to farming as well?

but again..that is true for how fishing works, how berries work, how everything works. so many are just defaulting to 'they want the story this way so that is how it should be' but they do not use the exact same logic to any other aspect of the game OTHER than the story even though the reasons for not questioning the story would logically be EXACTLY word for word the same for farming mechanics.

Here is what I think is the core 'block' for many. The special effects of the storm itself is very unique and well done and frankly awesome. However, I think people are confusing that experience with the 'concept of storms' as they put it. When something is visceral like the special effects of storms it can be hard to separate the emotional response to that specific experience to that of the point of having it at all. Mechanisms of the storms themselves, if that makes sense. I might be digging myself a deep hole I will regret but never the less there it is.

I like the idea of classes in some cases, its tricky, sometimes good sometimes bad so what I am about to say is not a 'anti' endorsement of classes but rather something to ponder. Wurm = 100+ skills Minecraft = no skill system. best selling game of all time I am not saying that is a argument for one way or the other but rather evidence on the table that should provide all of our assumptions with a pause. (I mention Wurm specifically because Notch worked on that project before starting minecraft)